If you are an evolutionist . . . - Page 3

Borodog · #21 08-26-2007, 03:35 AM

By the way, this post is a perfect microcosm of why I can't take you seriously, Phil.

1. Ad hominem and unsupported assertion
2. Appeal to authorities that aren't even authorities on half the subject at hand,
3. A snide paragraph that reveals that you have completely missed the point.

[ QUOTE ]
Your post reminds me of Nielsio where he said that atheism, anarchism, WTC conspiracy and global warming conspiracy all fit together. He was equally as wrong as you.
 . 
You should take a poll of experts on evolution and see how many are anarchists.
 . 
It's kind of silly to compare evolution to the free market. You could equally argue that all of higher biology works via command and control, so any biologist should believe in government. I've yet to see a higher animal that can survive without its brain. Pretty odd that evolution would make something so vulnerable and centralized, where a tiny patch of neurons controls the fate of the whole body through hormones and nerve signals . Perhaps the system works very well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Borodog · #22 08-26-2007, 03:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
In your world, with your way of thinking, the fact that governments and powerful religions exist and have always arisen has to be proof of the ability of humans to distort the social system to the detriment of freedom. I'm not sure there's an analogue in biology.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am.

Duke · #23 08-26-2007, 03:48 AM

Borodog is winning this thread handily.

Phil153 · #24 08-26-2007, 04:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
1. Ad hominem and unsupported assertion

[/ QUOTE ]
Count up your own. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
2. Appeal to authorities that aren't even authorities on half the subject at hand,

[/ QUOTE ]
No, not at all. Perhaps you're just drunk, but your comprehension is weak tonight. You claim in the OP:

[ QUOTE ]
If you are an evolutionist . . .. . . then you should be an anarchist. Do you see why?
If you aren't, I don't think you really understand evolution, or else you have an inconsistent worldview in which you have failed to apply the lessons learned in one field to the other.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm suggesting a little empirical test - polling the people who understand evolution the best. Since they undoubtedly understand evolution better than an amateur like you, it would be equivalent to claiming that a disproportionate number are failing to apply the lessons learned...

3. A snide paragraph that reveals that you have completely missed the point.
Not at all. I completely get the point that the process of evolution and the process of the market are very similar, and produce amazing outcomes when given enough time. This is sophomoric, simple stuff man. No one is disagreeing with you on this point. I'm getting the point, and offering an example of the pitfalls of applying such logic too broadly. Understand? Here it is again:

Since the most advanced cell collections and cooperative systems on Earth, comprising trillions of cells, operate largely under a command and control structure, shouldn't society do the same? After all, society operates nowhere the timescale or trial scale of evolution, and is much closer to the human body on these points. Luckyme got what I meant.

BTW, to claim the brain/nerve/muscle/hormone system is decentralized is a big fat lol. The human body is very analogous to powerful government regulation and an overwhelming command structure. The only parts decentralized are low level functions - and even they are regulated.

chezlaw · #25 08-26-2007, 04:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
. . . then you should be an anarchist. Do you see why?

If you aren't, I don't think you really understand evolution, or else you have an inconsistent worldview in which you have failed to apply the lessons learned in one field to the other.

This works both ways, by the way.

You creationists still have my blessing to be statists.

gogogogo.

[/ QUOTE ]
statism evolved from anarchy

Duke · #26 08-26-2007, 04:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, to claim the brain/nerve/muscle/hormone system is decentralized is a big fat lol. The human body is as controlled and centralized as you get.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll say that I agree with you, but I still think that Borodog argued better. I'm not a fan of appealing to expert opinion, and like straight up reasoning.

If you look at either governments or corporations as super-organisms, they're behaving exactly like an individual human does. The CoG (Corporation or Government) does things at times that seem to be at odds with the constituency. It screws over large segments of the population for its own gain.

The brain does that too. Everyone does things that hurt their bodies because it feels good. The brain acts selfishly too.

If you go a certain number of levels deep, the evolution of government is following the same path as we did. And I guess that's the whole thing with evolution. Its constant struggle against entropy -should- result in a universal ecosystem. And we're just along for the ride at this point in time.

Think about what's artificial in either system. Is the central government an artificial constraint created by us, or is it a product of an evolutionary process? I say it's a product that keeps coming up time and again. To force anarchy from time to time would be the artificial constraint. Just because we named the result "centralized government" doesn't mean that it's artificial.

I say that we could wipe out government and go straight back to a free market anarchy, and within a few hundred years we'd be right back where we are. The details would be different, but the result would be the same.

Cliff's Notes: Centralized government is the natural evolution of anarchy.

Duke · #27 08-26-2007, 04:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. . . then you should be an anarchist. Do you see why?

If you aren't, I don't think you really understand evolution, or else you have an inconsistent worldview in which you have failed to apply the lessons learned in one field to the other.

This works both ways, by the way.

You creationists still have my blessing to be statists.

gogogogo.

[/ QUOTE ]
statism evolved from anarchy

[/ QUOTE ]

I was typing mine while you posted, so I didn't copy. Good work - you're right.

MrBlah · #28 08-26-2007, 04:53 AM

I believe in evolution because from what I've learned in school (which wasn't a whole lot) the theory seems consistent, can be observed empirically and I have no reason to doubt it.

I don't believe in anarchy as a proper political system because I want to protect the stupid and the weak (just because). The resulting economic inefficencies are just the costs for the protection of said less priviledged individuals.

Why is this inconsistent?

Duke · #29 08-26-2007, 04:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I believe in evolution because from what I've learned in school (which wasn't a whole lot) the theory seems consistent, can be observed empirically and I have no reason to doubt it.

I don't believe in anarchy as a proper political system because I want to protect the stupid and the weak (just because). The resulting economic inefficencies are just the costs for the protection of said less priviledged individuals.

Why is this inconsistent?

[/ QUOTE ]

Whenever you have "just because" as part of your reasoning you're conceding that your ideas aren't consistent.

m_the0ry · #30 08-26-2007, 05:08 AM

Humans have astoundingly brought the process of evolution to a sub-generational process. We are impressed by our parents, our peers and the people that command our respect. Our species excels because of this open-endedness of the mind and the way we are shaped by our culture in our youth.

Stop me if I mischaracterize you Borodog. It seems you are denying social Darwinism outright. Competition is the essence of evolution, are you implying that competition doesn't exist between the most powerful societies in existence today? Is it a procedural problem you have with it or a philosophical one? You argue, 'our system is weak,' but is it possible for evolution to produce anything but its greatest achievement as the most powerful entity?